Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

In that sense, you could argue Battler is the one who "wouldn't let her die," though I'm still finding that interpretation of the sin tenuous at best (What if he doesn't ever come back and Shannon winds up marrying George? Isn't the legend dead then?). Thematically, that would fit with the book in the coffin which was clearly placed there by (and probably written by) Battler himself. And the whole notion that Beatrice wanted him to destroy her.

However, he did make that promise to take her "off the board" and tried to resurrect her, so maybe everything's flipped around and Battler is the only person who doesn't think Beatrice's legend should die. What, if anything, would be a positive from this is beyond me at the moment but I'm sure he has a good reason because it's not like he's incompetent or anything, right?

Though I'm still not that fond of the idea of killer-loli Maria.
That would need one hell of a good explanation...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renall

What, if anything, would be a positive from this is beyond me at the moment but I'm sure he has a good reason because it's not like he's incompetent or anything, right?

Well it isn't necessarily negative, if the legend should survive.
It would protect Kinzo, who practically imprisoned 2 women and made his own daughter live a life that was below human. It would protect the greedy parents who maybe threw away their humanity for mere gold. It would protect the psyche of 4 (maybe only 3) people in a terrible love-relationship of terror. It would protect Ange from having to live with the fact that it was their own families fault for being wiped of the earth. As long as there is an evil witch to blame...
And as we all know, the Black Witch and the cute Golden Witch can exist alongside ... so Battler could free one from the gameboard and trap the other there forever (if we also include the meta-plot).

I'm not entirely sure about that, because I get the sense that Battler is angling for a noble truth rather than a noble lie. The whole "accept the witch and you can make everyone virtuous" thing is something he was gradually broken of, but it seems like he's trying to navigate some middle ground between that and "this is the hard truth, deal with it and suffer over it." Exactly what that is, I dunno. Merely suggesting there is merit to the Golden Witch conceptually doesn't seem to be quite enough, since he wants to save her but also to take her away from the board, so in that sense it seems like he intends to break the legend down without necessarily "killing" Beatrice's concept. Whether that means something referring to the actual person or just on a metaphorical level I dunno.

In that sense, you could argue Battler is the one who "wouldn't let her die," though I'm still finding that interpretation of the sin tenuous at best (What if he doesn't ever come back and Shannon winds up marrying George? Isn't the legend dead then?). Thematically, that would fit with the book in the coffin which was clearly placed there by (and probably written by) Battler himself. And the whole notion that Beatrice wanted him to destroy her.

However, he did make that promise to take her "off the board" and tried to resurrect her, so maybe everything's flipped around and Battler is the only person who doesn't think Beatrice's legend should die. What, if anything, would be a positive from this is beyond me at the moment but I'm sure he has a good reason because it's not like he's incompetent or anything, right?

Well, he is incompetent in the first place. Thats already been well established. So...Yeah, he probably just wants a chance to make himself a sandwich with her cow tits or something.

Moreover, if Battler's return is what necessitates the survival of the Legend, how that links up with Battler's sin isnt...well to call it vaguely expressed would be an understatement.

Quote:

Though I'm still not that fond of the idea of killer-loli Maria.
That would need one hell of a good explanation...

Obviously Maria isn't the mastermind (unless shes really just a midget, and not a little girl, in the first place). But she did wind up needing the friend that Beatrice wound up becoming for her. Episode 4 talked at some length about the fact that a universe only needs a minimum of two people to be born, and Ange recognizes what she's doing by splitting them up in the Episode 4 Tea Party.

And if we accept the Yasutrice explanation, then Maria would also have wound up being the only friend in the world that Yasu had. Im pretty sure that Jessica only knows Yasu as "Shannon" and not as "Yasu", so it may not be the kind of true, heartfelt friendship she desired.

There's an awful lot made out of the relationship between Maria and Beato throughout the series. There's definitely something of potent meaning to it for Yasu/Beato herself.

Just like how we can't simply ignore love's relevance to the story, we can not ignore the potential meaning of Maria's existence. There's a reason why, when Battler was shown to have forgotten his promise, the only person in the world Beato wanted to be with was Maria.

Yet at the same time Ange seemed to sort of expose that relationship as being based on a sort of superficial dependency, as MARIA sort of just wandered off into the ether once reunited with Sakutaro. Maybe I'm reading that harshly, but it seemed like she was pretty much abandoning Beatrice.

Yet at the same time Ange seemed to sort of expose that relationship as being based on a sort of superficial dependency, as MARIA sort of just wandered off into the ether once reunited with Sakutaro. Maybe I'm reading that harshly, but it seemed like she was pretty much abandoning Beatrice.

I know, but to be fair, that was the agreement MARIA made in order to be reunited with Sakutaro. So it's probably less about abandoning Beato and more about Beato simply ranking beneath a stuffed animal on the totem pole of relevance.

Regardless, what Im saying isnt so much about the importance of "Beato to Maria", but about the importance of "What Maria is to Beato". What is the meaning of that connection? Why is Beatrice so attached to her? It's important, and a large chunk of her actions are guided by that connection, from the opening move in each game, to the Episode Tea Party.

We understand that Beatrice is probably Maria's only friend that isn't completely imaginary. And of course Maria has always been overly defensive about whether Beatrice exists or not (apparently she does). That's clearly explained.

Beatrice was her friend, therefore she exists. If she says shes a witch and proves it, then if it walks like a duck, etc.

But what we have yet to be shown is why Maria is so important to Yasu. That's actually a pretty big thing we're missing here. It's a pretty constant undercurrent to the plot, especially Beatrice's motivations, that we've overlooked.

Sure it's not as flashy as the love story or the murders themselves, but we've been hit over the head how important it is throughout the series. It's been firmly established that next to Beatrice's connection with Battler, Maria's friendship with her is Beatrice's most powerful motivation/feeling/connection.

Yet at the same time Ange seemed to sort of expose that relationship as being based on a sort of superficial dependency, as MARIA sort of just wandered off into the ether once reunited with Sakutaro. Maybe I'm reading that harshly, but it seemed like she was pretty much abandoning Beatrice.

Actually, I agree completely on this. If we think that Maria sees Sakutaro as the embodiment of Rosa's love for her, then Beatrice is nothing but a temporary replacement, or even just a initial mean to be able to "bring Sakutaro to life" and "keep him alive".

I'm sure, though, Maria is one of the factors that allowed Beatrice to "materialise" in the real world, but she's not the reason why this Beatrice exist, in fact, EP6 and EP7 have told us quite clearly why this Beatrice exists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TehChron

Why is it so important?

This has also been answered in EP4 and EP7. In EP7 Beatrice said Maria was the only human to recognise her. Even if we say Genji, Kumasawa and Nanjo know about her, and keep the whole lie, they didn't recognise her as a witch, in the same way Maria does. Now, if we remember Amakusa's words from EP4, about a person creating some idea of self through recognition from others, then we can tell why Maria is so important to Beatrice.

__________________

"The name is Tin; Used is just an alias. I'm everything Shoe Box would like to be." - Used Can of the Aluminium Kingdom

My initial supposition is that Maria is a person whom you can approach as "yourself," which if we're assuming Yasu is forced to portray some other identity at all times would be a pretty refreshing thing. She's young, trusting, good at keeping a secret, and treats your tricks like real magic, which is something of an ego boost as well. If ep7's story is accurate, she also provides a lot of the occult foundation to the Beatrice myth, quite the opposite of the initial suppositions that Beatrice was the one bestowing it upon her.

Those are all pretty strong reasons to value her friendship, though I wonder if that's the case.

Bah... I think blue is only really necessary when you don't have a cooperating witch to play with. The only thing blue does is to force a witch to give an answer in red or fall victim of excruciating pain.

I actually don't think pain is ever mentioned, why exactly do you think it works like that? The rules stated when blue is introduced is that "blue must reject a witch. all blue must be answered before a specified time with red." Even the specific connotation that until the blue is refuted it is to be considered truth only sort of pops up later without explanation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chounokoe

Well, many people here are throwing mathematical, physical or chemical equations and technical facts on military history around, to try and prove why or why not explosions, WWII stories or Italians on Rokkenjima might or might not be true. So I hope you excuse, if I'm offended at you telling me off for raising that point.

Structurally, saying that a bomb that cannot have been there produced explosive force that it could not produce is equivalent to saying the witch blew the island up by magic, you know. It doesn't look like it, but it is. Challenging us to solve the mystery using human means implies that our knowledge of human means must be applicable. If it isn't applicable, it's not actually "human means".

You can always doubt the competence of the author, of course, and accept that he doesn't know that any given method is actually beyond "human means", or at least, uses it because the story demands it. Which would sort of be a cop-out, but a reasonable one, as authors do it now and again. A classical mystery doesn't normally offer questions like that, because it is commonly seen and written as a puzzle that has no context. But Rokkenjima undeniably has context that goes far beyond the initial two-day setup and clearly calls upon concepts from formal logic and geographical and historical knowledge.

You don't know where does the context end, and I don't either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TehChron

Well, he is incompetent in the first place. Thats already been well established. So...Yeah, he probably just wants a chance to make himself a sandwich with her cow tits or something.

The more I think about it, the more it seems to me that Battler's incompetence is greatly exaggerated from start to finish. Somewhere down there he has a single Right Idea.

__________________

"The only principle that does not inhibit progress is: anything goes."
— Paul K. Feyerabend, "Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge"

I actually don't think pain is ever mentioned, why exactly do you think it works like that? The rules stated when blue is introduced is that "blue must reject a witch. all blue must be answered before a specified time with red." Even the specific connotation that until the blue is refuted it is to be considered truth only sort of pops up later without explanation.

Even if it wasn't mentioned it was clearly shown, also the initial description of blue text wasn't even accurate to begin with. It doesn't necessarily need to be used against a witch, for example.
I'm more prone to believe that the initial description of the blue text was just a partial and incomplete description, and I prefer to deduce the real properties of the blue text from facts that have been shown.

On Beatrice's death:
It was explained in EP5 that "Beatrice" dies when the real person that is behind her loses the will to be Beatrice. In other words if Yasu stops pretending to be Beatrice, Beatrice dies.

In Lion's world, she never wanted to be Beatrice to begin with. So in a way Lion killed Beatrice before she could even born.
In Yasu's world, she lost her desire to be Beatrice once she learned that Battler couldn't remember his sin, couldn't remember the promise, couldn't understand her heart. At that point Yasu didn't want to be Beatrice anymore, and that Beatrice forever died.

Later Battler revived Beatrice, but that wasn't the same Beatrice, it wasn't Yasu's Beatrice, it was just a furniture that Battler created. The same way Mammon can be imagined by Maria and Ange the same way Beatrice can be imagined by different people. Battler by learning magic learned how to revive Beatrice, however that doesn't mean he renewed Yasu's will to be Beatrice, he simply created an imaginary Beatrice inside his world.

So when Will said "you are the culprit", he was pointing his finger to the real persona who gave birth to Beatrice in the normal timeline and who later lost the will to be Beatrice.

Even if it wasn't mentioned it was clearly shown, also the initial description of blue text wasn't even accurate to begin with. It doesn't necessarily need to be used against a witch, for example.

Generally it is seen to hurt characters only after the story is over, though. ("This is the midnight answer session...") Up until then it is clearly seen to be harmless even if nobody refutes it immediately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Later Battler revived Beatrice, but that wasn't the same Beatrice, it wasn't Yasu's Beatrice, it was just a furniture that Battler created. The same way Mammon can be imagined by Maria and Ange the same way Beatrice can be imagined by different people. Battler by learning magic learned how to revive Beatrice, however that doesn't mean he renewed Yasu's will to be Beatrice, he simply created an imaginary Beatrice inside his world.

So you're saying that the Beatrice seen at the end of Ep6 which everyone acknowledges as genuine and which acts independently is still the exact same imaginary Beatrice that he introduces early on in Ep6 in the study?
What's the miracle then?

__________________

"The only principle that does not inhibit progress is: anything goes."
— Paul K. Feyerabend, "Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge"

Generally it is seen to hurt characters only after the story is over, though. ("This is the midnight answer session...") Up until then it is clearly seen to be harmless even if nobody refutes it immediately.

I think it only depends on how much the theory "hurts" the target.
Blue truths were used against Erika pretty earlier in the story, nowhere close to the end, but they still became edges that pierced her body. Arguably a stake that gouges your shoulder is nowhere close to a harmless event. Erika didn't show any pain but that might because she didn't want to show it, or because she knew a good counterargument and therefore she wasn't that worried about it.
I think that generally speaking the more a blue truth gives you problem the higher is the pain you suffer as a consequence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver

So you're saying that the Beatrice seen at the end of Ep6 which everyone acknowledges as genuine and which acts independently is still the exact same imaginary Beatrice that he introduces early on in Ep6 in the study?
What's the miracle then?

Unfortunately I really can't see how it can be different. Beatrice died and nothing can bring her back. EP7 clearly opened the catbox on that issue if you really had any doubt: Battler failed. When he reached the truth it was already too late.

What Battler created in EP6 was just a story to provide to Beatrice an happy ending that didn't exist as a matter of facts. That Beatrice only achieved the kind of resurrection that Kinzo wished for before Battler. That Beatrice just became exactly like the original Beatrice, but it wasn't the very same Beatrice. It wasn't Yasu's Beatrice.

What Battler created in EP6 was just a story to provide to Beatrice an happy ending that didn't exist as a matter of facts. That Beatrice only achieved the kind of resurrection that Kinzo wished for before Battler. That Beatrice just became exactly like the original Beatrice, but it wasn't the very same Beatrice. It wasn't Yasu's Beatrice.

Well, who or what was it then? Sure, BATTLER's Beatrice in the end is just a reconstruction of some kind. But what kind? If it's an idea, it exists in someone's mind, or on the minds of a group of individuals like all other ideas. Chick-Beatrice is independent from BATTLER from the moment she emerges. She may be a "personification of the rules of the board", but she clearly has her own ideas and does things BATTLER definitely does not want her to do. Therefore, if she's an idea, she exists somewhere else.

He can immediately reconstruct his own Beatrice that is exactly like the original, but doesn't have free thinking, and by the end Chick-Beatrice becomes capable of acting in the same manner. It is obvious that becoming able to act like someone does not mean becoming them, so she is not the same. However, for the very same reason it is clear that she couldn't be BATTLER's own simulacrum, because that simulacrum was able to act like the Original Beatrice immediately.

So what really happened? I think you're oversimplifying it. As a matter of fact...

Was Yasu's Beatrice really the only active entity calling itself "Beatrice" on the board? Sure, it existed. Did it actually do anything interesting? What exactly prevents another person from having a very similar mental construct, but actually being responsible for something?

__________________

"The only principle that does not inhibit progress is: anything goes."
— Paul K. Feyerabend, "Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge"

Even if I don't clearly understand the difference between the robot-Beatrice and chick-Beatrice, both Beatrices were created by Battler. It is specified in many ways

Featherinne says that that Beatrice is Battler's furniture.
Chick-Beatrice says that she was created by Battler and because of that she calls hims father.
Battler says that now that he learned magic he can bring Beatrice outside that world.

Nothing says that your own furniture can't possibly act in a way you do not desire.

...Well, I admit I was dumb for a while. This really was a fair mystery from the start, and I was complaining because I couldn't see the answer. I can't believe I was this blind. I think I understand the single truth now.
I know crap about Beatrice-1/2/3 whatever. Lion/Yasu...Not a clue about that. Well, a clue or two.

But I think I managed to understand what happened in the island, and who is the culprit. I need to finish some University stuff and edit a few things my editor asked me, but I'll be back in around a week to present my theory with reds and screenshots to prove it. I can't believe that no one(including me) noticed that before. It's...UGH.

When I tried reading eps 1-4 as one single golden age book, the answer practically screamed at me. Will's "illusions" make a lot of sense when you think like this.

Well played Ryuukishi, you fooled me completely for a while. It's not only fair, it satisfies both Knox and Dine...It abuses a few wordings, but it satisfies them both,

Guaranteed, I could still be wrong, but it fits so well...And if I am wrong further investigation will prove it. Either way this is a fun line of reasoning.

Even if I don't clearly understand the difference between the robot-Beatrice and chick-Beatrice, both Beatrices were created by Battler.

Sure, they were. But you hit on the difference yourself -- it is like the difference between a robot you built and a child you gave birth to.

That's a very wide gulf.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will Wright

Guaranteed, I could still be wrong, but it fits so well...And if I am wrong further investigation will prove it. Either way this is a fun line of reasoning.

You know, giving us a few words about what is it that screamed at you would annoy the onlookers much less. If it's something for which quotes from the text can be found, I can find them in the text faster if only because I have the decrypted scripts right here.

__________________

"The only principle that does not inhibit progress is: anything goes."
— Paul K. Feyerabend, "Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge"

Alright, since I suppose I shouldn't have posted that without at least telling you guys about it. Sorry.

I just don't want to make any announcements before making sure I'm right. If I'm wrong, it would be rather embarrassing. But this reminds me of the reason I posted that I had got a theory here in the first place. Which I forgot to do.

A few questions:
-Can anyone confirm to me if the games the exact same amount of time?(Game Board wise, not as in how long it takes to finish the episode)
-Can anyone clarify to me the forgeries/books thing? I just want to make sure I got that down correctly.
-Do we have Word of God about the definition of "alternate truth" or "red"? Did Ryuukishi ever talk about Red in detail?
-What exactly did Ryuukishi say about Umineko being solvable again?

Also, please don't have too high hopes for this. I might be very very wrong. Just assume I'm an arrogant newbie until proved otherwise, that's the best approach. Still need to finish checking a few things before knowing one way or the other.